Th4tGuyII

Whelp, we’re one step ever closer to terminators. Just gotta let Boston Dynamics cook now

Exactly. The big problem with LLMs is that they’re so good at mimicking understanding that people forget that they don’t actually have understanding of anything beyond language itself.

The thing they excel at, and should be used for, is exactly what you say - a natural language interface between humans and software.

Like in your example, an LLM doesn’t know what a cat is, but it knows what words describe a cat based on training data - and for a search engine, that’s all you need.

And yet they’ll be scratching their heads trying to figure out why more people are returning to piracy.

Went to check - had personalised Ads off on every account I have already, so I guess I won’t be seeing what Google’s got on me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Depends - I currently use Heliboard which doesn’t seem to have any problems as long as I stick to dictionary words.

Samsung’s keyboard sucks though - not only would it miss obvious typos, if you made the same typo often enough, it’d start learning the “word” and autocorrecting the actual bloody spelling to the typo!
(I had a habit of swaping the i and e in their, so of course Samsung decided “thier” was what I clearly meant to type)

From what I see on the article, it looks like it mostly applies to manufacturer set passwords - though it does look like the devices are now required to prompt the user if they try to set a weak or common password (though I can’t remember the last time I wasn’t prompted)

Exactly - the poor and working class are constantly told they need to evolve to keep up, why shouldn’t that apply to rich people too?

It’s great that the FCC can get back to doing it’s job properly now that its chair isn’t an industry plant

It’s gross, but also inevitable. If there’s an untapped niche to make money from, somebody’s going to try it – plus if they want to waste their money on generating accounts only to have them be banned, then so be it.

Makes me kinda thankful that this community is smaller and less likely to be targeted by this sort of crap.

I’m a bit late to the party, but I would be inclined to agree with the majority here. Your choice to have their cookies deleted on browser close is adding more friction to an already quite high friction process - you managed to get them to switch over, you don’t want to undo all that over cookies of all things.

You have to remember, it is their machine at the end of the day, and while you might be able to put up with having to redo 2FA loads due to cookie deletion, they’re clearly not… And if that’s going to be the dealbreaker, you’re far better off forgetting cookie deletion for now and focusing on more passive privacy options like blocking 3rd party cookies, trackers, and ADs.

Damn that’s both insanely impressive and terrifying at the same time!
I see one of those things chasing me in the street I’m praying to Gods I don’t even believe in

I genuinely have to wonder if Musk is intentionally trying to kill Xitter, because if he’s actually trying to recoup his “investment” he’s going about it completely the wrong way

I feel like in most cases if a product has such bad reviews that it kills the company that made it, there’s a good reason for that.

Of course there are exceptions, and it is expected that a reviewer do their due diligence to make sure they’re giving an honest, accurate, and reasonable review, but no company should be shielded for being told their product isn’t good if it isn’t.

"…source code will only be supplied in one of three formats, they say: “a copy handwritten on papyrus, a slide-show of blurry screenshots recorded on a VHS tape, or that I dictate it to you personally over the phone.”

Technically speaking you could get your hands on the code if you were determined enough haha

Imagine spending billions to get beat by a Commodore64

Because it’s worth knowing beforehand what a company is really like behind closed doors.

Some companies are great, some suck in standard corporate fashion, but there are some out there that are exceptional in sucking…

I’ll use myself an example… the last company I worked for, our team was constantly given deadlines that were impossible to meet within work hours. The company basically refused to pay for what was essentially mandatory overtime required to catch up - wage theft by a different name.

Fortunately my role allowed me to push back, but most of peers didn’t - we were all straight out of university, some needed the money/job, but most just didn’t know how to fight in the corporate environment.

Not to mention that a few folks who did try to complain against the company conveniently found themselves fired for some miscellaneous breaches of contract. From what I heard, one was even fired based on their reaction to being told they were being dismissed - quite literally entrapment.

If you’re wondering why we didn’t sue or anything like that, again we were all straight out of uni, we barely knew what our working rights were…

Which is why Glassdoor was important - it was how most of these folks got word out about the company and tried to warn other potential candidates of what they were walking into.

The company knew about it too because they posted multiple fake reviews to try to drown out the real ones. I know for a fact that if they were able to find out who posted these, they would have retaliated, likely in the form of litigation.

…

Exactly how do Glassdoor expect people to give earnest reviews of their employers (which is literally the core of their business) if those people can’t trust Glassdoor to not to throw them under the bus when they give honest reviews of malicious employers?

Talk about sabotaging your own business model - idiots.

Sometimes sure, but an LLM realistically has no decision making ability - it isn’t considering strategies or ethics, or anything else for that matter, it’s just pulling together an answer based on what people have said in similar contexts in it’s training data.

I wouldn’t want a parrot to decide who 's shooting who, nevermind nukes - though to be fair no one person or thing should be deciding either of those things anyway

I don’t mind having my own arguments thrown back in my face, but I do disagree with the premise that humans are anything like LLMs.

We have more than just a catalogue of conversational training data. We are hugely influenced by our current emotions, experiences, and traumas/fears.

I do agree with the idea that we shouldn’t give too much power to one person, but I’d argue it’s due to a lack of objectivity and a tendency towards selfish actions, rather than acting like an LLM.

Ultroning the world to achieve world peace isn’t exactly the best outcome, especially for innocent folks caught in the crossfire